Petitioner Has Reached Dot Age: Bombay HC Directs Trial Court to Complete Nonagenarians Cross-Examination Despite Respondents Transfer Plea

Case: Trilok Singh Gandhi vs Rajendra Kaushalraj Mehta

Coram: Justice AS Gadkari

Case No.: Civil Writ Petition No. 2210 Of 2022

Court Observation: “It is made clear that if the Respondent does not cooperate with the trial Court in that behalf, the trial Court is directed to record the said fact and may adopt appropriate legal remedies as may be permissible under the provisions of laws including the Civil Procedure Code,”

“in protracting the hearing of the Suit filed by the Petitioner for reasons best known to him”

“It is an admitted fact on record that the Petitioner/Plaintiff is 92 years of age as of today. It appears from the pleadings of the Respondent that the Respondent is interested in protracting the hearing of the said Suit filed by the Petitioner for the reasons best known to him. For the sake of argument even if it is presumed that the Principal Judge of the Small Causes Court, at Mumbai, allows the Application for transfer of Suit to some other learned Judge, then also the fact on record remains that the Petitioner has reached dot age and the same cannot be disputed.”

Previous Posts

Perceived Unfairness Of Hire & Fire Policy Substantially Diluted If Sufficient Notice Is Given To Employee To Respond To Charges: Calcutta HC

Sexual Harassment at Workplaces Kerala HC Calls for Prompt Re-Constitution of Local Complaints Committee under POSH Act upon Expiry of Its Term

NEET-UG: Meghalaya HC Conditionally Affirms Single Judge Order Granting Relief to Candidate Who Missed Counselling Due To Spam Email

Grave Misconduct: Rajasthan HC Imposes 1 Lac Cost On Advocate Who Filed Original Application Without Authorization, Superimposed Sign By Xerox Machine Etc.

Gratuity Can Be Forfeited If Employee Terminated For Causing Damage to Employer Property, Forfeiture Not To Exceed Extent of Loss: Delhi HC

Persons Who Purchased a Portion of Paddy Land after Commencement of Act Cant Reclaim It For Residential Use: Kerala High Court Overrules Earlier Precedent

Right of Accused to Cross-Examine Prosecutrix Can’t Always Be Denied Only Because Of Section 33(5), POCSO Act: Uttarakhand High Court

Assessee Recourse to Constitutional Provisions Not a Proceeding under Income Tax Act: Kerala High Court

Balance Sheets Entries Can Amount To Acknowledgement Of Debt U/s 18 Limitation Act: Supreme Court Sets Aside NCLAT Full Bench Ruling Download Judgement

Keywords

Nonagenarians Cross-Examination, Dot Age